Santorum telling ridiculous lies about my country

This is why I hate politics.

reply to post by gwynnhwyfar


Not a problem. Your own opinion is your own judgement as far as I am concerned. They used to call euthanasia "mercy killing". I know a lot of people, especially in the medical field, believe they are doing people a service by helping them die.

reply to post by gwynnhwyfar

In Hospice, they will give medication to help you be comfortable, but they will not prolong life. The idea is that you are dying, so you should be able to die in as much comfort and dignity as possible. So, no IV drips to provide hydration, since she could not take it in naturally, on her own.

That would be passive euthanasia and I have heard that Hospice resorts to that.

Passive Euthanasia - To end a person life by not taking the necessary and ordinary action to maintain life. This can be done by withdrawing water, food, drugs, medical or surgical procedures.

www.terrisfight.org...

Please do not insult me with your BS about Hospice and their version of palliative care, as I had to watch my own father be "Hospiced" at the hands of a wicked stepmother.

Originally posted by poet1b


From what little I have read about Santorum, he makes Palin look intellectual.

The U.S. Republican party has gone completely off the map for this guy to even be considered a possible nominee, let alone the current front runner.

Fascism is indistinguishable from any parody thereof.

What's more, the Republicans actually had a very qualified candidate. He was good at business, knew something about the world, was smart, good looking, very intelligent, electable, and kept his wiener in his pants.

Of course the fact that he wasn't a crazy hatemonger, an bigoted idiot, or a water carrier for the billionaires meant that Jon Huntsman had no chance.

If the USA were competent republic that it once was, we'd see Hilary Clinton vs Jon Huntsman.

reply to post by mbkennel


So you think Hillary is a viable candidate? She is just like Obama, just as Marxist, just as Socialist. The Democrat Party is de facto socialist party these days. And I have news for you. If we were still a competent Republic we wouldnt be courting Socialism and Communism and people wouldnt be demanding a direct democracy in the streets.

Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by mbkennel

 

So you think Hillary is a viable candidate? She is just like Obama, just as Marxist, just as Socialist. The Democrat Party is de facto socialist party these days.

In what possible universe is Obama a Marxist or socialist? You have been listening to people who have moved the center of their perceived normality so preposterously far to the right that you think a moderate to conservative Democrat like Hillary Clinton is a Marxist.

An actual socialist, like for example Hugo Chavez, actively seizes major private property without compensation and has the nationalization of most sectors of the economy, economically and in management, as an explicit and fundamental policy platform.

An actual Marxist does the same things, and then executes the capitalists.

Here is what actual socialists think about Obama:

www.forbes.com...

reply to post by mbkennel


No, my opinion is based on statements he has made, actions he has taken. It is truly amazing how so many people still refuse to see what's right in front of us all.
The evidence is there. Even in his own words in his book. The Communist Party backs him. DSA backs him. His early mentor FMD was a communist. His mother was communist. It's all there and some are willfully in denial.

keywiki.org...

obamaism.blogspot.com...

Here's a quote from Obama himself that reeks of socialist/communist/marxist philosophy

"It’s because you have an obligation to yourself. Because our individual salvation depends on collective salvation." - Barack Obama

And here is the commentary on that blog

Collective? Common prosperity? "the ultimate goal of socialism is common prosperity" Source: Yang Chungui, The Marxist

obamaism.blogspot.com...


Study the blog then get back to me mkay?

oh and by the way, didn't you notice all the nationalizing of private industry he has done in 3 years? If not, time to WAKE UP!
A little wake up call for ya

And this is exactly why i'm moving out of this country (USA) this year.
I can't handle the government one bit and who they let lead a whole country
and I can't handle most the people ( or sheeple I should say) that I confront daily (not everyone just ALOT).
Can't wait to say goodbye and never look back.

Nice find OP

Originally posted by SergeantTrammelant
I just stumbled upon a clip of Rick Santorum. It's actually quite unbelievable.

In The Netherlands, people wear a different bracelet. And the bracelet is.. 'Do Not Euthanize Me'. Because involuntary euthanasia (?) .. in The Netherlands... about half the people who are euthanized every year (and it's 10% of all deaths in The Netherlands) .... half of those people are euthanized involuntarily at hospitals.

So elderly people in The Netherlands don't go to the hospital. They go to another country. Because they are afraid, because of budget purposes, that they will not come out of that hospital.

I cannot even begin to describe how false these statements are. Nobody wears such a bracelet. I did a search on the internet and it does not appear to even exist.

Euthanasia is a very delicate subject in my country. It is legal to perform if requested by a terminally ill patient and is required by law to be carried out by 2 doctors. Any doctor may refuse the operation at any time.

If the person is being kept alive by machines in a hospital and not in a consicous state and there is no hope for recovery, it is the family that decides to eventually stop the machines. No one ever gets euthanized because of a doctors decision, as Mr. Santorum is implying.


How people can vote for this man is really beyond me.

edit on 19/2/12 by SergeantTrammelant because: (no reason given)

He is far better than flip flop Mitt. At least he's honest. Mitt on the other hand is a mass production lie machine.

Originally posted by Malcher
This thread is the first time i read bout this. Did a search and went to page 10 of the results.

Found this article from 2004. Seems this comes from a book.

Doctors in the Netherlands are also renowned for withholding treatment from psychiatric patients and the elderly. It is no secret that the elderly often avoid hospitalization for fear they will be put to death. In response to this trend, thousands of Dutch people carry papers or where bracelets that say “do not euthanize me.”

www.wnd.com...

There may be some truth to it.

How would we know if it was or was not true?

Do they Euthanize old people?

No, they definitively do not. Article 2 of the European Convention on Human Rights enshrines absolutely the right to life. This is taken extremely seriously and derogation is only permitted in very particular circumstances i.e. man firing guns indiscriminately may have force (potentially lethal) used to prevent harm to the public.

Voluntary euthanasia is perhaps a separate matter - I don't know if it's legal in the Netherlands, but voluntary euthanasia is, it goes without saying, very different from being murdered.

Originally posted by mbkennel

Originally posted by poet1b


From what little I have read about Santorum, he makes Palin look intellectual.

The U.S. Republican party has gone completely off the map for this guy to even be considered a possible nominee, let alone the current front runner.

Fascism is indistinguishable from any parody thereof.

What's more, the Republicans actually had a very qualified candidate. He was good at business, knew something about the world, was smart, good looking, very intelligent, electable, and kept his wiener in his pants.

Of course the fact that he wasn't a crazy hatemonger, an bigoted idiot, or a water carrier for the billionaires meant that Jon Huntsman had no chance.

If the USA were competent republic that it once was, we'd see Hilary Clinton vs Jon Huntsman.

edit on 20-2-2012 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)

edit on 20-2-2012 by mbkennel because: (no reason given)

Very true. I'm appalled that Huntsman did so terribly when he was demonstrably far and away the most able candidate and the one with the most realistic ideas. Instead, we see the likes of that fat pig Gingrich and nutter Santorum elevated to national attention.

Originally posted by Malcher
This thread is the first time i read bout this. Did a search and went to page 10 of the results.

Found this article from 2004. Seems this comes from a book.

Doctors in the Netherlands are also renowned for withholding treatment from psychiatric patients and the elderly. It is no secret that the elderly often avoid hospitalization for fear they will be put to death. In response to this trend, thousands of Dutch people carry papers or where bracelets that say “do not euthanize me.”

www.wnd.com...

There may be some truth to it.

How would we know if it was or was not true?

Do they Euthanize old people?

If Santorum believes everything he reads on the internet, then surely he must believe:
santorum (san-TOR-um) n.
1. The frothy mixture of lube and fecal matter
that is sometimes the by-product of anal sex.

www.spreadingsantorum.com...

After all, it's the top non-sponsored hit when you search for the definition of Santorum

reply to post by LilDudeissocool

He is far better than flip flop Mitt. At least he's honest. Mitt on the other hand is a mass production lie machine.

What a clown this guy...still believing in these cartoon politicians...what the hell is wrong with you

Originally posted by Gawdlike
And this is exactly why i'm moving out of this country (USA) this year.
I can't handle the government one bit and who they let lead a whole country
and I can't handle most the people ( or sheeple I should say) that I confront daily (not everyone just ALOT).
Can't wait to say goodbye and never look back.

Nice find OP

So do you think the sheeple will be different in oh say France, Italy, or how about Greece? Or wait you were thinking of the Netherlands where it seems euthanasia is popular and accepted.

Originally posted by gwynnhwyfar
reply to post by BellaSabre

 

Clearly. What is your point?

We have DNR's in this country and have for years; they are requested by the patients. They post the DNR (Do Not Resuscitate) orders right on the patients' doors, to make sure if there is a DNR in place, nobody runs in and begins heroic measures if a patient starts to pass on. To be honest, often, at that point, it is difficult to even determine if a person who is close to passing is still with us or not. The breathing is so shallow as to be almost non-existant, the heartbeat is weak and frequently hard to detect. Get a grip

Because of these comments and others, I got the impression you think a DNR equals euthanasia, and that disconnecting life support so a person can die on their own is also euthanasia. Perhaps I am mistaken.

In euthanasia a person is an active participate in causing the person's death, ie, administering a fatal medication, while in the other two scenarios the person is simply allowed to die naturally, without efforts to revive them. There is a big difference.

Just sayin'.

ETA: Wow, the flavour of this thread has really changed since I last posted! lol. I think I'm "off topic", now, even though I'm "on topic".

Off to work. Have a great day Gwy, sorry if I misinterpreted your comments. I hate to sound like I'm telling someone something they already know!!!

reply to post by BellaSabre


DNR is just not rescuscitating, and withholding food and water is passive euthanasia. There is a debate over DNR though, and she may be right that DNR is a type of passive euthanasia, or withholding life saving measures. But the patient's heart or breathing has already stopped. However, as this document asks, do we want doctors to not revive people who go into cardiac arrest? This document explains that there has to be a DNR agreement already in place.so a doctor cannot just say, oh I think today I will not rescuscitate people.

A DNR order is a legal document that instructs medical practitioners to not attempt any revival techniques on a particular person if their breathing or heart stops. Fortunately, not just anyone can request a DNR order on your behalf. Only two people can do this; the individual who does not want to be revived, and in situations where someone is of diminished capacity, those with their Power of Attorney (almost always family). However, once a DNR order has been granted, a person is able to change their mind and have it withdrawn at anytime.

debate-euthanasia.blogspot.com...

Active euthanasia involves more direct action, but many sources seem to agree there is really very little difference between the two. But there still is a distinction.

"Passive euthanasia" is usually defined as withdrawing medical treatment with the deliberate intention of causing the patient's death. For example, if a patient requires kidney dialysis to survive, and the doctors disconnect the dialysis machine, the patient will presumably die fairly soon. Perhaps the classic example of passive euthanasia is a "do not resuscitate order". Normally if a patient has a heart attack or similar sudden interruption in life functions, medical staff will attempt to revive them. If they make no such effort but simply stand and watch as the patient dies, this is passive euthanasia.

"Active euthanasia" is taking specific steps to cause the patient's death, such as injecting the patient with poison. In practice, this is usually an overdose of pain-killers or sleeping pills.

www.pregnantpause.org...

One can not always know if removing a breathing tube will result in death. There have been cases where an apparatus was removed and the patient survived.
Intent seems to be an important element and in active euthanasia there is no doubt about the intent to end a patient's life.
The slippery slope comes in when patient's are euthanized without their consent or knowledge. When you have legislation that actively supports euthanasia, the slippery slope comes in for euthanizing people against their will, because it will be harder to prove intent and people will not want to go to court.

reply to post by gwynnhwyfar


I don't believe that people always turn to Hospice with the intention of being passively euthanized. I think they believe that Hospice is there to give special care and attention, not to withhold it. Is it palliative care or is it withholding? Which one ?

Anyone trying to compare hospice with euthanasia doesn't know what they're talking about.

Hospice in the U.S. is about people who are going to die and nothing can be done to save them. Instead of spending their last days on earth in the unpleasant environs of a hospital, they get to die at home. This also saves tens of thousands of health care dollars in the process.

Just one anecdotal account: My wife had an elderly aunt who was diagnosed with a terminal illness and given less than a month to live. The doctors told her there was nothing that could be done, the best option was to go home and call in hospice. The family threw a fit; the doctor finally said that all that could be done was to transfer her to a larger medical center in a nearby city and have them perform an operation to confirm the diagnosis. That was done and long story short, one complication led to another, the woman spent the last month of her life mostly unconscious in the hospital and the bill was well over fifty grand (this was some years ago.) This sort of thing is a large part of what is driving up health insurance costs in this country.

There are two hospice facilites in my town, and you must have a life expectancy of three weeks or less to enter one. All they promise is they will keep you out of pain, and you won't be alone. The painkillers often bring on the death quickly.

As for the other, this is why it's important for people to have these decisions made beforehand, so their wishes can be respected.

You are getting into philosophy now. By definition, palliative care is not euthanasia. The other parts of it, I suppose, are a matter of opinion.

Originally posted by lordtyp0

He wont get in the white house though. People enjoy seeing whackos on TV but they are not so stupid as to give nukes to them.

George W Bush